Comparisons

I checked out Cracked.com first, which is noted for its highly humorous tone and style. Most of their articles are presented in lists and frequently use captions and images to further provide humor. The writing is typically informal and often involves slang and profanity. Often, the writers  reference geek humor and pop culture, thus having a broad appeal to several different types of audiences. Sources are often just direct links though, so it is not very professional. Another publication I looked at was Pitchfork.com, a music site. Pitchfork has a bit of a bad reputation for being pompous and overtly-critical in regards to its musical opinions. They are often deemed only for hipsters. While I think there is some legitimacy to this claim, it is not as bad as people depict it. Though the writing can be overly serious, it does go into some criticism that isn't popular to acknowledge and I respect that of them. Because it is largely opinion driven, there are no real sources. Articles are structured with a score towards the top of the page and a detailed review on the bottom.